AUTH/1882/8/06: General Practitioner v Sanofi-Aventis – Acomplia (rimonabant) MIMS page tag ruled an advertisement

📅 2006 | 🖉 Dr Anzal Qurbain
📊

Key facts

CaseAUTH/1882/8/06
ComplainantGeneral practitioner
CompanySanofi-Aventis
ProductAcomplia (rimonabant)
MaterialDetachable page tag attached to a full-page MIMS advertisement
Main issueTag showed brand name only; lacked approved (non-proprietary) name and (as ruled) required prescribing information
Panel findingTag was an advertisement and had to stand alone; could not rely on PI in the adjacent advertisement
Breach clausesClause 4.1 and Clause 4.3
SanctionsUndertaking received
Complaint received09 August 2006 (site) / 10 August 2006 (report)
Case completed25 September 2006 (site) / 26 September 2006 (report)
AppealNo appeal
Applicable Code year2006

Download the full case report (PDF)


Reviewed by Dr Anzal Qurbain (FFPM) — ABPI Final Signatory

🤖

Got a question about this case?

Ask one of our 13 specialist ABPI advisors — instant answers, 24/7.

Ask AskAnzal AI
🎬 Expert Video Walkthrough
🎬
Video walkthrough — coming for members
Subscribe now and get expert video analysis for every case as we publish them.
Subscribe — from £299/yr
📋

What happened

  • A general practitioner complained about an Acomplia (rimonabant) page tag issued by Sanofi-Aventis and attached to a full-page MIMS advertisement for Acomplia.
  • The tag featured only the brand name “Acomplia” and did not include the approved (non-proprietary) name.
  • Sanofi-Aventis argued the tag was a reusable minor stationery item/promotional aid (Clause 18.3) and therefore could carry the brand name only.
  • The Panel considered the tag’s purpose was to draw attention to the advertisement; it was detachable and a separate item.
⚖️

Outcome

  • The Panel ruled the page tag constituted an advertisement.
  • As a standalone detachable item, it required the non-proprietary name and prescribing information and could not rely on the prescribing information in the adjacent MIMS advertisement.
  • Breaches were ruled.
  • No appeal.
🔒

Unlock the full case analysis

Members get the complete breakdown — Clauses, Sanction, Signatory Lens, Audit checklist, and 3 Key Questions.

Best value
£249/year
Annual — save £99
or
£29/mo
Monthly
Join Now — Instant Access

⭐ Business Intelligence Access

See the full compliance picture for every pharma company

291 Company Intelligence Reports — breach patterns, appeal history, industry ranking, PDF export.

Request Access →
⭐ Flagship Programme

AQP Flagship Path — the complete UK ABPI signatory programme

12 modules. 12 weeks. Final Signatory readiness. The industry standard for ABPI Code signatories — £995 + VAT.

Enrol — AQP Path Learn more

📰 Weekly PMCPA Case Breakdown

One real case. One key lesson. Every week — free.

Subscribe Free
🎓 AQP Training